Polygamists Challenge Utah's Anti-Polygamy Law

[syaoranvee]

Source

SALT LAKE CITY (RNS) Utah's complicated history with polygamy starts a new chapter Wednesday (July 13) as a reality-show family challenges the state's ban on plural marriage, a fight that could go all the way to the U.S. Supreme Court.

Nationally known constitutional law professor Jonathan Turley said the federal lawsuit does not call for plural marriages to be recognized by the state. Instead, it asks for polygamy between consenting adults like his clients, Kody Brown and his wives, to no longer be considered a crime.

“We are only challenging the right of the state to prosecute people for their private relations and demanding equal treatment with other citizens in living their lives according to their own beliefs,” Turley said in a press release.

The Browns star in the TLC network show “Sister Wives.”

Utah Attorney General Mark Shurtleff said the country's ongoing legal wrangling over same-sex marriage will necessarily grow to include plural marriage -- quite possibly centered around this case.

“I'm confident that we can (defend) a challenge all the way to the Supreme Court,” Shurtleff said. “Ultimately, this decision is going to have to go there. You see it coming.”


...

So if I get this right, it's some Polygamists creating a reality show around their lives while living in a state which doesn't allow it. I suppose if you want to get a message out, that's a way to it.

[HarleyThomas1002]

And here I thought Utah would'be been a-ok with polygamy. They should try the Middle East. From what I understand polygamy is all right there.

On another note why is polygamy. Was someone upset that the woman they liked was married to another man who already had three other wives?

[Wykked Wytch]

I think that polygamy and polyandry is fine as long as all the people involved consent and are free from pressure.

[SimSim]

Polyandry is a type of polygamy. The proper term is polygyny.

[Vene]

Jul 14, 2011 16:20:00 GMT -5 Wykked Wytch said:

I think that polygamy and polyandry is fine as long as all the people involved consent and are free from pressure.

I hate that people keep saying this. It's never said for monogamy, after all.

[Mlle Antéchrist]

Provided that everyone is consenting and the laws don't discriminate based on gender/sex/orientation, I don't have a problem with legalized polygamy.

e:

I hate that people keep saying this. It's never said for monogamy, after all.

The reason people say it is to stave off the inevitable "BUT WHAT ABOUT THE CULTS THAT FORCE UNDERAGE GIRLS INTO MARRIAGE!?" or "BUT WHAT IF ONLY MEN GET TO HAVE MULTIPLE WIVES!?" comments. When the average person hears "polygamy", they picture fundamentalist Mormon compounds, where 12-year-olds are married off to old men who already have 5 wives. Granted, it's probably less necessary on a forum like this, where the average member is intelligent & open minded enough to understand the concept, but after a while it just becomes automatic.

[Alyra]

I think any relationship, regardless of how many people are involved or what sex or gender they are, is okay, as long as everyone involved is a consenting adult. Period. As long as it's not hurting anyone, it's not the state's business what people do in the privacy of their own homes. I think it's reprehensible that it's taken this long for society to start figuring that out.

[Dragon Zachski]

I'm perfectly fine with polygamy and polyamory.

While I disagree with Mormon doctrine, I recognize that many of the issues brought up with polygamous marriages exist in monogamous marriages, too, it's just that people are stupid and blind sometimes.

[DeadpanDoubter]

You people are being a bunch of babies...obviously, it's perfectly fine for a man to do whatever he wants with his wife, he just can't have more than one. Why? Well, obviously, God wants each man to have an equal chance at buying marrying a woman.

As far as this polyandry nonsense goes, everyone knows there's no woman on the planet who could cook and clean for more than one man, bless her heart.

[ironbite]

Is it wrong I saw the title of this thread as Poltergeists instead of Polygamists?

[Keiro]

No, no it's not, ibs.

[kzn02]

Strangely, I recall hearing on the radio that polygamy in the Middle East has caused people to become gay since they couldn't afford a wife.

[sylvana]

The case confuses me a little.
While I can understand that polygamy should not be considered a crime, which is perfectly fair, I wonder about the circumstances. Marriage is a legal construct, as such, with polygamy currently not recognized only the marriage between the first two people will be seen a valid. That said, there are no rules about co-habitation or who this married couple then has sex with.

The only objection I have with polygamy is the legal ambiguity behind it. Unlike homosexual marriage it is not a clear cut legal issue. It is a lot easier to share and split legal responsibilities between two people, but when large groups become involved especially with the more traditional polygamist marriage where there is a single male and multiple wives, things get a little tricky legally when the focal point of the marriage dies / leaves. However, if they hammer out all the legal details, then let them go for it.

[RavynousHunter]

Actually...its really quite simple. (Yeah, I have a LOT of free time to think about shit like this.)

Say you have...4 people, Persons A-D. They can be any mix of genders and sexualities you want, it doesn't really matter for this little thought experiment. NOW, under current (monogamy vs polyamory) law, Person A can only marry Person B, C, or D, not any combination thereof that would produce more than one partner for Person A.

However, there is one thing I've thought about someone bringing up. That is, the overhead of having to record all the linking marriages. However, a great deal of things, especially government things, have gone digital in the past...oh, 20 years or so. As such, marriage records are also likely to be digital, and in the form of a database. Now, you could easily patch both the database and the software that's used to update it very easily, its done all the time with things like MMORPGs. Granted, they're not as capacious as a marriage database, but the methods have all been tried, tested, and proven. My guess, it could take...maybe a year or so to develop and deploy the patch.

After that...it simply become a matter of legalizing it, which I'm all for. So long as the people being married are consenting, willing adults, then there isn't a problem, to me. It'd just be a software patch...the kind of thing that goes on all the fucking time in the digital world. And marriage licenses? Simple, just have one for each pair, problem solved. Sure, it'd mean more paper...I suppose you could requisition a longer one for you and your spouses and turn your multiple copies in to be recycled.

Its all really...quite simple. The only real roadblock is getting through some particularly thick skulls.

[chad sexington]

Jul 14, 2011 22:19:12 GMT -5 kzn02 said:

Strangely, I recall hearing on the radio that polygamy in the Middle East has caused people to become gay since they couldn't afford a wife.

I've heard this too. Not just because they can't afford a wife, but because of the gender segregation.